Human rights and administrative detention centres

L’objectif de ce travail est de problématiser le concept de centre clandestin de détention à partir de trois matériaux produits à des époques différentes et en provenance de champs distincts : le politico-institutionnel, le scientifi co-académique et le juridique. L’effort fourni pour encadrer théoriquement ce concept discursif nous amènera
à repenser ses frontières poreuses avec des catégories voisines telles que le camp de concentration et l’établissement pénitencier. Notre réfl exion se fonde sur une série de questions : en Argentine, qu’appelle-t-on un centre clandestin de détention ? Qu’est-ce qui le caractérise ? Quels critères fi xent ses limites ? Le lieu physique délimite-t-il son unité en tant que telle ou peut-on envisager l’existence d’un centre clandestin qui accepte, successivement dans le temps, plusieurs lieux géographiques ?

Il dibattito sulle reali possibilità dei detenuti minori di reintegrarsi nella società è un tema sensibile e drammaticamente attuale che va inserito nell’ambito dell’individuazione di efficaci strategie volte alla riduzione ed alla prevenzione dello svantaggio sociale entro il quale si ascrive la popolazione dei detenuti. Partendo da questo presupposto, l’articolo si interessa di un mondo poco conosciuto, quello dei minori reclusi, ed è supportato dallo studio sul campo presso l’Istituto Penale Minorile di Nisida (NA).

Η διερεύνηση των λοιμοκαθαρτηρίων και των κέντρων διοικητικής κράτησης μεταναστών διαπνέεται από μια βασική υπόθεση. κάθε φορά που το νεωτερικό έθνος-κράτος καλείται να διαχειριστεί την είσοδο πληγέντων πληθυσμών, ενεργοποιεί το εργαλείο του στρατοπέδου. Τα παραδείγματα των lagers ανά τους αιώνες και τις διαφορετικές περιοχές του παγκόσμιου χάρτη είναι πολλά. Η γενίκευση της παραπάνω υπόθεσης θα μπορούσε πιθανότατα να γίνει για κάθε περιοχή της υφηλίου όπου μια κεντρική εξουσία έχει το μονοπώλιο της απόφασης πάνω στη ζωή και το θάνατο ενός πληθυσμού. Το παράδειγμα που αφορά στη συγκεκριμένη διερεύνηση είναι το ελληνικό έθνος-κράτος από το 19ο αιώνα και τη συγκρότησή του μέχρι σήμερα.
Οι χώροι κράτησης, από εκείνους της καραντίνας του 19ου και των αρχών του 20ου αιώνα έως τα σύγχρονα κέντρα κράτησης μεταναστών χωρίς έγγραφα, συγκροτούν την τεχνολογία εγκλεισμού του μη πολίτη, εκτός της σφαίρας του κοινωνικού και της σφαίρας των δικαιωμάτων του ανθρώπου. Η παραπάνω λειτουργία επιτελείται με όρους βιοπολιτικής περίζωσης του υποκειμένου, με όρους καθήλωσης και εν τέλει υποκειμενοποίησης. Άλλοτε στον μολυσμένο, σήμερα στον ξένο, σε αυτούς που βρίσκονται εκτός της περιγραφής του κυρίαρχου προτύπου του υγιούς, καθαρού και παραγωγικού υπηκόου, εγγράφονται ένα σύνολο από αρνητικές συνδηλώσεις ως προϋποθέσεις είτε για την είσοδό τους στον κοινωνικοπολιτικό χώρο της επικράτειας του έθνους-κράτους είτε για την εξόντωσή τους.
Στην παραπάνω συνθήκη ο χώρος πρωτοστατεί. Φαίνεται σαν η ιστορική προοπτική των λοιμοκαθαρτηρίων του παρελθόντος να είναι οι συνοριακές δομές κράτησης του παρόντος. Στο πρώτο μοντέλο εγκλεισμού αποκρυσταλλώνεται, με την πάροδο του χρόνου, η εμπειρική γνώση που φαίνεται να ενεργοποιείται στο δεύτερο. Η ανάγνωση του χώρου των λοιμοκαθαρτηρίων μέσα από επιτόπια έρευνα συναντάται στην τυπολογία που εξάγεται από τις αυτοψίες στα σύγχρονα κέντρα κράτησης μεταναστών του Έβρου ή της Αμυγδαλέζας. Οι μαρτυρίες των περιηγητών του 19ου αιώνα που περιγράφουν την εμπειρία της κάθαρσης στον Άγιο Γεώργιο Σαλαμίνας, των προσφύγων των αρχών του 20ου αιώνα που επιβίωσαν από την καραντίνα στο Καραμπουρνάκι Καλαμαριάς και των έγκλειστων μεταναστών στο Αλλοδαπών της Π. Ράλλη στις αρχές του 21ου αιώνα αποτυπώνουν το βίωμα του υποκειμένου στην τεχνολογία εγκλεισμού που διερευνάται εδώ.
Σε μια επόμενη κλίμακα, το τοπίο του εγκλεισμού διαμορφώνεται με όρους τεχνικών πολεμικής διαχείρισης είτε αυτό βρίσκεται σε συνοριακό είτε σε αστικό περιβάλλον. Σε κλίμακα επικράτειας, η χωροθέτηση τόσο των λοιμοκαθαρτηρίων του 19ου αιώνα όσο και των κέντρων κράτησης του 21ου αιώνα, όπως αυτή εξάχθηκε από τα αρχεία και τον τύπο της εποχής για τα μεν και όπως προκύπτει από επιτόπιες έρευνες σε διαφορετικές χρονικές στιγμές για αμφότερα, μοιάζει με χαράξεις στρατιωτικής διαχείρισης.

"Human Rights in Closed Environments" examines the human rights of people detained in ‘closed environments’; that is, non-public sites of segregation including prisons, police cells, immigration detention centres, disability
facilities and psychiatric institutions. The inmates of such closed environments are vulnerable to human rights violations given their isolation from society and powerlessness. With reference to the author’s fieldwork in
the closed environment of correctional facilities, this essay reviews "Human Rights in Closed Environments" and argues that there is a need for governments and the broader community to interrogate the ideological basis
for detention. A human rights oriented discourse suggests that the loss of liberty should not be exacerbated by further punitive and degrading measures; rather, the emphasis needs to shift to a paradigm of transparency, dignified
care, responsibility and rehabilitation.

The United States has had a wavering acceptance of immigrants throughout itshistory, from eager invitations to violent and immediate forced removals. Presently, immigrants from Central America are in the spotlight, who have been dehumanized into that of the “other” and subjected to harsh deportation and criminal proceedings as a result of these perceptions. This article will show that ‘othering’ immigrants has been a part of restrictive immigration policy since the origins of the United States, continuing to present day by the following: 1) “othering” is explained in application to undocumented immigrants in America; 2) a history of US deportation policy is discussed in order to provide a context to the deep-seated tendency of “othering” in the US; 3) recent federal U.S. policies are introduced, examining the constant presence of “othering” unauthorized immigrants, with a primary focus on the Secure Communities program; 4) the widespread phenomenon of “othering” is discussed, both in the US and internationally, as well as the current state of the “alien other” in American political discourse.

This essay reviews six recent texts published regarding migrant deportation and detention: research based monographs by Mary Bosworth, Nick Gill, Tanya Maria Golash-Boza, Shoba Sivaprasad Wadhia, and Tom K. Wong, and an interdisciplinary collection edited by Daniel Kanstroom and M. Brinton Lykes. Each book, individually, makes an important contribution to scholarship on immigration enforcement policies and practices. Read together, the books provide an outstanding overview of the causes and consequences of these policies and practices across national contexts and disciplinary boundaries, as well as challenges to altering them.

This paper examines the indefinite preventative detention of non-citizens in the UK, arguing that the reasoning of the House of Lords in A v Secretary of State for the Home Department has not been applied within the crime control context. This paper analyses the jurisprudence in relation to indefinite preventive detention in the (non-terrorism) immigration context, arguing that whilst ideas emerging in anti-terrorism law have influenced immigration law, in a wider context, beyond terrorism, the internal logic of immigration control which justifies its discriminatory coercion with assertion of the sovereign right of the state to exclude aliens, has caused resistance to the reasoning of the majority of the House of Lords in A in regard to the preventive detention of non-citizens. It contends that the UK's reliance on these principles is undermined by the fact that the UK has exercised its sovereignty to expressly limit it through its ratification of the European Convention on Human Rights and other international human rights instruments.

Seven-month study on the conditions in the Italian detention centers, and their legal, medical, social and psychological services in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of a Master of Science degree in International Health.

Responsibilities: Served as Team Leader with full responsibility for the research design and implementation. Managed and controlled all aspects of data collection during joint monitoring missions. Produced a comprehensive report synthesizing all findings and recommendations. Provided direction to the planning, coordination and implementation of advocacy efforts for the rights of migrants/refugees.

Suggested Citation:
Poluda, J. (2006). Gesundheitsversorgung unter den Bedingungen der italienischen “Centri di Permanenza temporanea ed Assistenza”: Erfahrungen und Wahrnehmungen der “Gäste” und des medizinisch-psychologischen Fachpersonals (Master’s thesis, Humboldt University of Berlin, Berlin, Germany). https://www.academia.edu/attachments/56357039/download_file?st=MTczMTY4NzA4Miw3MC40MC4yMjAuMTI5&st=MTU5MTE2ODQ1MiwxNzUuMTAwLjYwLjIyMiw3NTA1NTMy&s=profile

Original study conducted in 2005 by Rutvica Andrijasevic, published in the book Islam and Tolerance in Wider Europe (ed. Pamela Kilpadi). The study utilized original field research and materials provided by Italian authorities, European institutions and NGOs to provide an overview of migration policies implemented in Lampedusa, Italy and Libya. Migrants commonly departed from Libya in overcrowded makeshift boats and embarked on a journey lasting up to several weeks. Once in Italian waters, they were intercepted by Italian border guards and transferred to the Lampedusa holding centre, where they were kept for between five and forty-five days. A detailed investigation is provided and recommendations for future policies and practice impacting migrants and asylum seekers.

Il contributo propone un’analisi dei dati relativi al trattenimento degli stranieri all’interno dei Centri di Permanenza e Rimpatrio e dei c.d. “punti di crisi” (hotspot), di cui all’art. 14 T.U.I. I dati disponibili, tratti dai report delle Autorità competenti e delle ONG, confermano le criticità note, riproponendo il dubbio circa l’adeguatezza delle strutture e l’efficienza di tale sistema di governance dei confini.

This paper recalls what occurred between February 2011 and March 2013, respectively the beginning and the end of the so called ‘North Africa emergency’ and aims at underlining how the changes in the configuration and meaning of territorial borders seriously affect the lives of those who had to leave a country for another, as their legal or illegal status and their rights depend on shifting administrative and migration control procedures. Starting from Weber’s (2006) analysis of manipulation of borders by authorities the paper wants to argue that in the Italian case the borders shifted to a ‘stand-by’ position: not really closed, not really open, since controls, when performed, had effects unforeseeable in advance, as the end of North Africa emergency shows.

The concept of home, of having a home, and of not having a home preoccupied the thought of Jacques Derrida. Home is representative of many things: it could be a place, a language, a culture, a house, a nation-state, or even a state of mind. Ultimately, the question of home is also about one’s sense of self and the place one occupies in the field of existence. The importance of home in locating, and, to a degree in defining one’s self, becomes urgent once jeopardized. The kind of trauma involved in losing one’s home and self-hood can be so profound that it has the capacity to shake the very foundations of our existence. The desire to protect one’s self and home from harm, threat, or invasion is instinctual, even primeval but is sadly too often done at the cost of others. In a present-day age where there are countless refugees because their homes have been destroyed by war, climate change, or other disastrous events, sovereign nation-states are too ready to ignore their need for asylum. In fact we are living in a world where a first world media demonizes foreigners as potential terrorists who threaten the safety of citizens and nation-states. We are living in a dangerous world made all-the more dangerous where difference is demonized. By closing our selves, homes, and countries off to the call of others what we are in fact doing is eroding the important space of difference that makes our identity complex and alive. The dream of sameness or self-identity is a narcissistic fantasy that erases both self and other in its encircling gaze.
Difference is an extremely important concept to Derrida because it mediates relationships, including our relationships to justice, hospitality, and democracy—principles that again should not be made self-identical, self-same, or self-present in that their efficacy lies in their fluidity and lack of place.  Although Derrida’s thinking is critical of desires that pursue self-presence, his own thinking is not exempt from desire as his insistent hope for a generous democracy to come conjures a future full of promise. The illumination of Derrida’s call for an unprecedented democracy to come asks us venture to a no-place (oú tópos) that is yet to be charted. The tantalizing promise of “to come” lingers on the threshold of idealism as we wait for the advent of an unconditional democracy that might just arrive.
This essay does a number of things. First it examines Derrida’s experience of displacement as an Algerian Jew at a time when France’s sovereignty over Algeria was powerful enough to disrupt his sense of home and identity. Secondly it addresses the urgent issue of homelessness in a present-day where refugees are vulnerable to the laws and powers of sovereign nation-states, including modern democracies. Thirdly it considers an extreme example of injustice where asylum-seekers are imprisoned in detention centres despite the fact that they have not broken any laws. And finally, the essay questions if Derrida’s desire for a more open and liberal democracy to come is possible in a contemporary world where the rights of individuals are constantly violated.

L’intero libro di Bitar è un’eccezionale cronaca del periodo in cui egli fu detenuto per oltre un anno in Patagonia, nel più meridionale campo di concentramento della storia. L’opera è, insieme, il racconto della prigionia condivisa con alti funzionari del governo democratico di Allende e una toccante testimonianza in grado di preservarne la memoria per le nuove generazioni. Dal libro, già tradotto in molte lingue e ora anche in italiano, è stato tratto l’omonimo film del 2009.

I ask that any individual that can help identify the multiple rights violations within these original reports of torture and abuse that have been smuggled out of the detention center to please , cite the various violations whether it be international federal or provincial

L'internamento amministrativo di donne ticinesi a Bellechasse (1925-1971)

Che tracce hanno lasciato negli archivi le persone oggetto di internamento amministrativo? Cosa raccontano della loro esperienza? Che informazioni danno riguardo alla storia delle misure coercitive a scopo assistenziale anteriori al 1981? Viene qui presentato uno studio inedito di testimonianze scritte di donne ticinesi internate nel penitenziario di Bellechasse, nel Cantone Friborgo, tra il 1925 e il 1971: emergono particolari strategie di resistenza e di adattamento a questa forma di privazione della libertà. Un contributo che si pone in continuità con le indagini sulle biografie e i percorsi di vita di persone oggetto di internamenti amministrativi e altre misure coercitive a scopo assistenziale della “Commissione peritale indipendente (CPI) internamenti amministrativi”, indagini sintetizzate nella prima parte del contributo. Pubblicazione della Rivista per le Medical Humanities (disponibile gratuitamente qui: http://rivista-rmh.ch), quadrimestrale edito dall'Ente Ospedaliero Cantonale del Cantone Ticino (EOC).

"We examined the secret evidence, ex parte. It is impossible to reveal it. Considering the materials that we saw, we cannot say that there is a reason to intervene in the military commander's decision to prolong the administrative detention."

Immigration is a notoriously complex and hotly contested issue, now more than ever.

To make matters more complicated, harmful myths surrounding immigrants and immigration frequently find their way into mainstream rhetoric, especially since the Trump administration’s rise to power, further obscuring the common perception of immigrants and immigration policy.

Many of these myths — such as that immigrants don’t pay taxes or that they take jobs from American citizens or that they are criminals and terrorists — have been repeatedly proved as simply untrue. The problem with such frequent use of “alternative facts” and myths promulgated by our leaders is that they tend to be repeated...

Read more here: http://www.thenewstribune.com/opinion/article140675868.html#storylink=cpy

"Artículo de Periódico relativo al contexto de aprobación del Reglamento de Funcionamiento y Régimen Interior de los Centros de Intenramiento de Extranjeros así como un breve análisis de sus implicaciones. 

Cuatro claves del reglamento CIE
Christian Orgaz

La Ley de Extranjería aprobada en 1985 creó la posibilidad del internamiento administrativo. Esta ley fue la condición sine qua non para la incorporación al Espacio Schen­gen. Desde entonces, el Estado español se ha convertido en la fron­tera sur de la Europa Fortaleza. Ha militarizado sus fronteras, encerrado y expulsado a decenas de miles de personas. Ahora, 29 años después, se publica el Real Decreto 162/2014, de 14 de marzo, por el que se aprueba el reglamento de funcionamiento y régimen interior de los centros de internamiento de extranjeros. ¿Por qué ahora?
Sin duda por el contexto y la acción de denuncia jurídica y social de las diversas organizaciones sociales e instituciones ante las constantes vulneraciones que, en los casos más extremos, adopta la forma de malos tratos, violaciones y muertes. El fallecimiento de Samba Martine en 2011 e Idrissa Diallo en 2012 por la negación de la atención médica necesaria puso en jaque la gestión gubernamental de los CIE ante la opinión pública. El ministro de Interior respondió anunciando la "inminente" aprobación de un reglamento que evitaría estas situaciones. Nada más lejos de la realidad, en diciembre de 2013 muere Aramis Manukyan y se suceden diversas denuncias por agresiones en los CIE.
En este contexto, que incluye la masacre de Ceuta2, el Gobierno decide aprobar un reglamento como forma de cerrar el frente abierto en los CIE. Sin embargo, las críticas desde diversos sectores (colectivos de abogados, Servicio Jesuita para Migrantes, Campaña Estatal por el Cierre de los CIE, Campaña para que el Derecho no se detenga en las puertas del CIE y numerosas ONG) no se han hecho esperar. El reglamento consolida la naturaleza de la institución y abre nuevas posibilidades realmente inquietantes:
1) El reglamento aprobado confirma el modelo policial, no reconoce importantes autos judiciales (como el relativo a ser avisado con 12 horas de antelación antes de la deportación), ni las recomendaciones de diversas organizaciones. Legali­za la entrada de armas en los centros y, en definitiva, no cambia su naturaleza: insuficiente desarrollo legal de una medida tan grave como la privación de libertad; gestión policial que concentra un gran poder en la figura del director -éste decide sobre aspectos no reglamentados y claves desde el punto de vista de los derechos como, por ejemplo, el derecho a comunicación telefónica de los internos/as-; instalaciones estructuralmente deficientes;  recursos económicos insuficientes;  mecanismos de queja que no garantizan el secreto de las comunicaciones…
2) El reglamento abre la vía a la privatización al establecer que las labores asistenciales (de sanidad, sociales, culturales…) podrán externalizarse mediante contratos y convenios con empresas y ONG. Un modelo privatizador que ya se ha ensayado con Cruz Roja y que no ha evitado muertes como la de Samba. En última instancia se supeditan las necesidades de las personas internas al presupuesto más ajustado y al silencio cómplice y culpable de las adjudicatarias.
3) El reglamento no sólo regula insuficientemente el régimen interior sino que no regula los criterios específicos de ingreso. Según la ley, el internamiento debería ser una medida excepcional y el último recurso tras valorar exhaustivamente la situación de la persona. Además, muertes como las de Samba podrían repetirse porque el reglamento sigue sin regular los protocolos sanitarios en los traslados desde los Centros de Estancia Temporal de Inmigrantes (de Ceuta y Melilla) a los CIE.
4) El reglamento establece la posibilidad de internar a personas consideradas vulnerables como menores, discapacitados, ancianos, mujeres embarazadas, madres con hijos... (cuando muchas de estas personas no son “expulsables” y, por tanto, no cabría su encierro en el CIE). Por otro lado, no establece la forma de identificar a potenciales solicitantes de asilo o víctimas de trata, ni la forma en que estas figuras de protección internacional han de darse, quedando bajo custodia del mismo cuerpo policial que las detiene. Finalmente, no reconoce otras identidades no normativas ni las necesidades específicas que podrían presentar.
El reglamento de los CIE pretende en última instancia legitimar el encierro y la expulsión administrativa de personas, así como frenar la deslegitimación que venía sufriendo la Policía Nacional y, por consiguiente, el propio Ministerio de Interior y el Gobierno. La estrategia del Gobierno pasaba por incorporar a diferentes organizaciones sociales en el proyecto, pero, a juzgar por las duras valoraciones emitidas por éstas, no ha funcionado. En definitiva, el reglamento es un fetiche jurídico y un artefacto político que sirve más a los intereses del Gobierno que, como declara, al reconocimiento de los derechos de las personas internas. Lejos de zanjar las críticas las ha avivado, la reglamentación legal continúa pareja al rechazo social. El mensaje de las organizaciones es claro, como sentencia la nota de prensa de la Campaña Estatal por el Cierre de los CIE: no se puede regular lo que no debería existir. Piden un cierre inmediato y sin condiciones. "


Orgaz, Christian (2014) “Cuatro claves del reglamento CIE” Periódico Diagonal, Nº219, 28/03/2014 pp.8-9. https://www.diagonalperiodico.net/global/22338-cuatro-claves-del-reglamento-cie.html

Derrida and the Refugee; or, Not Being-at-Home

The concept of home, of having a home, and of not having a home preoccupied the thought of Jacques Derrida. Home is representative of many things: it could be a place, a language, a culture, a house, a nation-state, or even a state of mind. Ultimately, the question of home is also about one’s sense of self and the place one occupies in the field of existence. The importance of home in locating, and, to a degree in defining one’s self, becomes urgent once jeopardized. The kind of trauma involved in losing one’s home and self-hood can be so profound that it has the capacity to shake the very foundations of our existence. The desire to protect one’s self and home from harm, threat, or invasion is instinctual, even primeval but is sadly too often done at the cost of others. In a present-day age where there are countless refugees because their homes have been destroyed by war, climate change, or other disastrous events, sovereign nation-states are too ready to ignore their need for asylum. In fact we are living in a world where a first world media demonizes foreigners as potential terrorists who threaten the safety of citizens and nation-states. We are living in a dangerous world made all-the more dangerous where difference is demonized. By closing our selves, homes, and countries off to the call of others what we are in fact doing is eroding the important space of difference that makes our identity complex and alive. The dream of sameness or self-identity is a narcissistic fantasy that erases both self and other in its encircling gaze.

Difference is an extremely important concept to Derrida because it mediates relationships, including our relationships to justice, hospitality, and democracy—principles that again should not be made self-identical, self-same, or self-present in that their efficacy lies in their fluidity and lack of place.  Although Derrida’s thinking is critical of desires that pursue self-presence, his own thinking is not exempt from desire as his insistent hope for a generous democracy to come conjures a future full of promise. The illumination of Derrida’s call for an unprecedented democracy to come asks us venture to a no-place (oú tópos) that is yet to be charted. The tantalizing promise of “to come” lingers on the threshold of idealism as we wait for the advent of an unconditional democracy that might just arrive.

This essay does a number of things. First it examines Derrida’s experience of displacement as an Algerian Jew at a time when France’s sovereignty over Algeria was powerful enough to disrupt his sense of home and identity. Secondly it addresses the urgent issue of homelessness in a present-day where refugees are vulnerable to the laws and powers of sovereign nation-states, including modern democracies. Thirdly it considers an extreme example of injustice where asylum-seekers are imprisoned in detention centres despite the fact that they have not broken any laws. And finally, the essay questions if Derrida’s desire for a more open and liberal democracy to come is possible in a contemporary world where the rights of individuals are constantly violated.

An increasing inflow of immigrants exposes European countries to unprecedented challenges in ensuring the efficiency of human rights. Rising xenophobia provokes states to narrowly interpret the 1951 Geneva Convention on the Status of Refugees. Among others, a rigorous application of the concept of an individualised fear of persecution excludes the general consequences of war. References to the safe parts of countries of origin are used to justify decisions on the non-granting of international protection. This analysis of the European Court of Human Rights judgment of 14 February 2017 in S.K. v. Russia (Appl. no. 52722/15) refers to all of above-mentioned themes. Moreover, the research compares the Council of Europe standards and Russian legislation and practice with those of the EU.

This article describes and analyzes an emerging problematic in the asylum and immigration debate, which I cynically dub the " imposter-child " phenomenon. My preliminary exploration maps how the imposter-child relates to and potentially influences the politics and practices of refugee status determination in the United Kingdom. I argue that the " imposter-child " is being discursively constructed in order to justify popular and official suspicion of spontaneously arriving child asylum-seekers in favour of resettling refugees from camps abroad. I also draw connections between the discursive creation of " imposter-children " and the diminishment of welfare safeguarding for young people. Further complicating this situation is a variety of sociocultural factors in both Afghanistan and the United Kingdom, including the adversarial UK refugee status determination process, uncertainty around how the United Kingdom can " prove " an age, and a form of " triple discrimination " experienced by Afghan male youth. Through unearthing why the " imposter-child " is problematic, I also query why it is normatively accepted that non-citizens no longer deserve protection from the harshest enforcement once they " age out " of minor status.

Cet article décrit et analyse une problématique émergente dans le débat sur l'asile et l'immigration, que je dénomme d'une façon cynique le phénomène des « enfants-impos-teurs ». Mes explorations préliminaires démarquent comment « l'enfant-imposteur » est relié aux politiques et pratiques de détermination du statut de réfugié au Royaume-Uni, et comment il les influence potentiellement. Je soutiens que l'enfant-imposteur est constitué comme discours afin de justifier la méfiance populiste ainsi qu'offi-cielle à l'égard des chercheurs d'asiles qui sont issus des arrivées spontanées, pour favoriser plutôt la réinstallation de réfugiés arrivant de camps à l'étranger. Je trace égale-ment des liens entre la création discursive de ces « enfants-imposteurs » et la réduction des aides sociales publiques pour les jeunes personnes. Cette situation est rendue encore plus compliquée par divers facteurs socioculturels en Afghanistan ainsi qu'au Royaume-Uni, dont notam-ment le processus antagoniste de détermination du statut de réfugié au Royaume-Uni (DSR), l'incertitude autour de la « preuve » d'âge dans le pays, et une forme de « triple discrimination » subie par les jeunes Afghans de sexe masculin. En faisant ressortir les raisons pour lesquelles l'enfant-imposteur est problématique, j'interroge égale-ment pourquoi il est normativement acceptable que les non-citoyens ne méritent plus d'être protégés des activités coercitives et d'exécution de règlements les plus sévères une fois qu'ils ont dépassé « l'âge limite » de statut de mineur.

Conferenza Programmatica Lidu Onlus - Progetti e prospettive

Introduzione: Alfredo Arpaia e Giuseppe Mazzei

Ore 09.30: Istruzione e Minori
Rosalba Andrea Catizone
Vito De Filippo

Ore 10.15 - Donne, Diritti e Dignità:
Alessia Lirosi
Barbara Pontecorvo

Ore 10.45 - Carceri:
Daniela de Robert

Ore 11.45 - Ambiente e Turismo:
Ignazio Abrignani

Intervengono: Min. Beatrice Lorenzin e On. Francesco Sanna

Giovedì 14 dicembre 2017 ore 9.00 – 13.00
(Teatro dei Dioscuri al Quirinale, Roma Via Piacenza, 1)

The Italian Left and the Movement for Undocumented Immigrants' Civil Rights

In this article we analyze the formation in Italy since the late 1990s of a protest movement against the administrative detention of undocumented immigrants, and the rising importance of this issue on the center-left government agenda since its election in April 2006. To do so, we take an interactive approach to the political process, refusing to view social movements solely as anti-institutional phenomena. After having pointed out the importance of the current debate within the government coalition with regard to the conversion of the CPTAs ("temporary stay and assistance centers"), we describe the emergence of radical protest against detention over the past 15 years, presenting the composition of these mobilizations and their repertoires of action. Their recent unification on the grounds of their common political culture and grammar is then described. Lastly, returning to the matter of the importance that detention has recently taken in the left's internal debates and attempting to identify the causes of it, we describe the new relations that have been established between parties and the immigrants' civil rights movement, and between center-left party apparatuses and their peripheries, as well as the structure of the political opportunities these relations entail.